From your linked study:

"The prompts used to create the images were not analyzed, so the findings do not provide an assessment of how many of the images were created without the consent of the people pictured or altered images which were already sexualized"

If someone uses Photoshop to create revolting images, do we rage against Adobe and the CEO? How about we act like grown-ups and focus on individual responsibility for using AI tools, or any tools?

The point remains. X responded to concerns, tightened the restrictions, and now people are complaining about too much moderation. Mass censorship isn't the path to a safer world. Banning everything isn't the path to a safer world.

Most people don't want to see revolting or inappropriate sexualized images, so they don't search for or prompt that content. That content is officially unwanted by the platform. There's always gray areas. Sometimes artists use the naked human form, and other times artworks may make you uncomfortable. Instead of declaring a moral calamity and linking to lobbyists asking for money, just move on to things more to your taste. Take responsibility for your own online activity. That's what adults do.

Many users including Musk responded at the time saying he's seen literally zero underage images generated by Grok:

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2011432649353511350

Anyone can use a range of offline tools and processes to generate nasty images, then blame whoever they want for that image. But who cares about that when there's outrage to spread am I right?

Your comment made it sound like "out of the box" Grok can generate AI porn. It can't.

That reddit sub you mention is tame compared to something like unstable_diffusion where the AI-porn hobbyists use locally installed models. Some of the comments in the grok_porn sub are complaining about censorship, and literally complaining about how the anime hack isn't working. So you've only confirmed my point and contradicted your own.

I've been messing around with sci-fi horror themes including graphic gore. Grok now does gore when before it wouldn't. When I tried nudity, it refused. This is with AI-generated images from scratch, nothing uploaded.

Even "romantic love scene between consenting adults" was denied by Grok. It did 6 seconds of lightweight kissing, then refused to continue. The overwhelming evidence is that Grok does not ordinarily do "AI Porn". It doesn't advertise that it does, and won't produce it in normal circumstances when prompted.

Did you just make that up?

Grok barely makes "M-rated" nudity, let alone porn. Musk recently claimed it can do "R-Rated content", but his post got a community note saying otherwise.

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2031989543529038103

The hallucination issue put a big dent in AI's reputation for non-technical older people who do not take kindly to being lied to by a machine.

Have you considered the possibility that more than one website picked up the volcanic cabins story because it's interesting?

Both articles mention the source: https://plat.asia which is clearly a genuine architecture site.

If you hosted a blog with architecture category, you might also write a post about the volcanic cabins. If the source allows publishing those high-res photos, why wouldn't you?

He lashes out, accusing others of lies, spin, gaslighting and peddling. He refers to "Twitter morons", takes a swipe at Trump (who doesn't) and self-delights in the belief that Anthropic are seen as "heroes" while the competition "sketchy".

Not a great post. It's in the own goal zone.

That said, if the US/Israel didn't do it, we'd have heard a denial by now. Perhaps the target was a nearby military site. Placing military sites next to schools sounds like a tactic from the Hamas Resistance handbook.

Before you ask "how's that going", remember that doing nothing wouldn't result in a satisfactory answer to that question either.

The idea that "killing the enemies turns the rest of the world into enemies" is absurd. Other countries wouldn't follow the Iranian regime into martyrdom. What would be the reason: "we don't like war"?

Nobody likes war, but also nobody likes evil dictators emerging on this planet and repressing 90 million of its inhabitants, and waging industrial scale terrorism offensives beyond its borders.

Looks like an optics dance to me. I've noticed a lot of simultaneous positions lately, everyone from politicians and protesters, to celebrities and corporations. They make statements both in support of a thing, and against that same thing. Switching up emphasis based on who the audience is in what context. A way to please everyone.

To me the statement reads like Anthropic wants to be at the table, ready to talk and negotiate, to work things out. Don't expect updated bullet-point lists about how things are worked out. Expect the occasional "we are the goodies" statements, however.

Guessing their comment attempts to expose hypocrisy of America's keenly supported overseas military activity in conflict with fiercely defended domestic free-speech and liberty principles. Deep down, most allies of America want America to defeat foreign adversaries and keep defending those liberties many of us share. In other words there's no hypocrisy, carry on!

Voodoo Chile lyrics: "on the night I was born the moon turned fire red".

Poetic license? Stellarium reveals on the early evening of November 27, 1942 in Seattle, the moon was low on the horizon - just 25 degrees altitude at 5:30pm, directly East. The sun set at 5pm. While not a full moon it was 85%, so I'm calling it! The moon may have glowed a warm orange-red on the night (of the day) Hendrix was born.

The insulting didn't end there. You asked his parents! Even then you only landed at 90%, yet another insult because why can't he earn 100%? Ethical dilemmas on all sides!

Is it though? When older sibling helps younger sibling with "accessing Steam", or something reasonable like that, even the most sensible and thoughtful older sibling won't be interested in "culture shifts" that block gaming fun.

The alcohol and seatbelt analogies try to elevate equivalence, but miss the mark by a lot. Even one drop of alcohol is obviously not suitable for underage. No seatbelt increases risk no matter your age. "Social media" exposure for the young person is often completely fine and full of "young person" content and activity.

Like any bad behaviour, the grown-up response should be discipline and education.

There's a million ways kids can misbehave. The idea is to get kids ready for the real world, not pretend there's nothing bad out there.

Obviously we don't want "point and click" AI nudes in the hands of minors, or kids having their own AI accounts in the first place. Parents and educators pay for their kid's devices and internet connections. If they're not being responsible, you take away the privilege until they learn about respectful behaviour.

If the kid is allowed to stay out after dark but ends up doing crime at those times, we don't ask the government to impose a curfew on every kid. We discipline the kids involved. And that's my last comment in this thread thank God, what a struggle.

Grok is censored, there's no question. Try it yourself. It can't even handle analysing a 19th century woodcut engraving containing topless mythical beings[1]. Grok refused because Grok has guardrails.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wood_of_the_Self-Murderers...

Speaking of freedom, I lost posting permission yesterday after my earlier post. Even though vile replies were insinuating vile things, my right of reply was taken away. We should never diminish the "name of freedom" as you've just done.

It should go without saying that CSAM is revolting. Who wants to see that stuff? Not me, not most people. Grok can't make that content. Maybe someone got around it temporarily. I've always thought Grok heavily censored, it refuses to analyse an image of the Statue of David because "naughty bits". The ironic and sad thing is a fig leaf gets around that restriction. So the accusation that Grok has no guardrails and can generate CSAM seems at best an anomaly or a lie.